Often I see the word vintage attributed to things that have merely a vague connection to it. So my apprehension over being handed ‘Vintage Magazine’ is somewhat understandable.
Vintage Magazine has been out a while now and whilst I have often picked it up to glance through I will openly admit I havent really read it, so yesterday I did. Cover to cover.
Ooohhh plus size lovely!
As I worked my way through, I was overall impressed with what was on offer. It lacked the overly flash layouts of other magazines on the shelves but then it is portraying a ‘vintage’ vibe so this was understandable.
I loved the pieces on plus size fashion which is very topical right now but perhaps (as a plus size woman) a little too marginalising. As though they don’t cover plus size generally. I maybe wrong to assume such a thing but as I only picked up one issue this is the impression I got; which is so often tge case when making plus size a feature. To ensure continued readership perhaps a note on how they always look at plus size would be beneficial? Perhaps not. I merely pondering.
Whilst the 60s article was fabulous and I can not fault their attention to detailing in the shoot, I was disappointed to not see a hair or makeup tutorial tied in with it however.
I loved the 50s fashion article. Full of juicy facts n photos. Bravo!
What did puzzle me was how the ‘Mr Selfridge’ article was marked as fashion yet barely discussed it? Also perhaps the perfect opportunity to again show how to recreate the look?
The images in this magazine are wonderful. Well done those people.
I hate to be negative over something so clearly born out of love but there are missed opportunities in this magazine to make it steller. I will buy again, if nothing else for the beautiful images n discounts offered. More focused articles and you have yourself an avid reader.
